TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules in favor of assessee on disallowance under Income Tax Act, Section 14A & 57(iii)</h1> <h3>Bharat Mitthalal Nagori Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1 (1), Pune</h3> Bharat Mitthalal Nagori Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1 (1), Pune - TMI Issues:1. Disallowance made under section 14A of the Act.2. Disallowance under section 57(iii) of the Act.Issue 1: Disallowance made under section 14A of the Act:The appeal challenges the disallowance of interest expenditure under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer disallowed interest expenditure of Rs.32,05,320, contending that the amount was invested in partnership firms whose income was exempt from tax. The assessee argued that no disallowance should be made as the investment was not for earning exempt income. The Assessing Officer also computed interest-free funds available and noted that the investment in firms exceeded the interest-free funds. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing that no disallowance was warranted as the investment was not directly related to earning exempt income, citing the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 366 ITR 505(Bom.).Issue 2: Disallowance under section 57(iii) of the Act:The second issue pertains to the disallowance of Rs.2,00,000 under section 57(iii) of the Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed this amount due to discrepancies in the interest rates on loans taken and advances given by the assessee. The assessee argued that the actual interest paid was higher than the claimed amount, thus no further disallowance was warranted. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, stating that since the actual claim was restricted, the disallowance of Rs.2,00,000 was deleted. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.In summary, the judgment addressed two main issues: disallowance under section 14A of the Act and disallowance under section 57(iii) of the Act. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues, allowing the appeal and overturning the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A).
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
